ROL ship second Select 4 release - RISC OS News, Software and Information

ROL ship second Select 4 release

Published: 30th Apr 2007, 22:15:53GMT Source: drobe.co.uk
By the Drobe news desk

Page 1 of 1

CDs in the post, downloads for the impatient

RISCOS Ltd today said it is shipping copies of Select 4 issue 2 to its subscribers. The latest release is also available online as a download to punters who renewed their subs after January 1, 2006.

The OS is distributed over the Internet in a 15M zip archive, or as a 63M ISO image, for users who can't wait to receive their CDs in the post over the coming week. Select 4 RISC OS 6 was previously available as a preview for people to test-drive after the Select subscription scheme was hit by several months of delays and set backs.

According to ROL, issue 2 of Select 4 includes "full printing support", new Viewfinder drivers, a hardware-accelerated version of the classic RiscPC Meteors game, a new user guide, a new tool to locate problems within !Boot sequences, an updated !Chars app, a new Pinboard configuration tool and RISC OS 6-themed backdrop set, a new 'try screen mode' button for the Display Manager, a new command to detect monitors connected to a Viewfinder card, five new fonts, and an executable checking utility.

This latest OS release from RISCOS Ltd is said to work on A7000 and RiscPC-class machines, and VirtualAcorn emulators published by ROL director Aaron Timbrell. It will not work on Microdigital Omega and Micos, RiscStations, Iyonixes and A9homes.

ROL boss Paul Middleton said: "Select 4 and its underlying RISC OS Six technology represents over 10 man years' of development which has taken RISC OS 4 from its 26bit version to its new fully 32bit neutral source version."

Links
Select 4 RISC OS 6 website - some users have reported problems opening the ROL zip files because they have invalid headers

This article has been linked to, or is available in the following formats:

[Printable] [Digg this] [Blog search]

rjek (+3.5) 30/4/07 10:42PM	While the conversion to 32 bit-safe code is a worthy feature, we're still left with only a 26 bit one available. One assumes Advantage 6 will make a version of Select 4 available for their customers later. For users of RiscPCs, there doesn't actually appear to be all that much new here, certainly from a user-facing perspective. Can we look forward to one of Drobe's famed comparison articles detailing what's actually different that'll make users' lives easier?
fylfot (+1.0) 30/4/07 10:49PM	With such a massive overhaul of the RISC OS sources, has there been optimisations, I wonder, that might lead to noticable performance increases?
sa110 (+2.0) 30/4/07 10:55PM	Apparently there have been increases in some areas but some of the increases of RO4 have been negated by their functions being moved out of the Kernal.
spanners (+2.0) 30/4/07 11:32PM	Select 4 plus Issue 2 = RISC OS Six Is this how the numbering is working now? (confused)
bluenose (+2.0) 1/5/07 7:06AM	In reply to spanners Read the FAQ on the RISC OS web site which explains that RISC OS 6 is the new base operating system for all future versions. Select are the softload updates to that operating system. http://select.riscos.com/RISCOS6/faq.html
pv (+1.0) 1/5/07 8:58AM	Has anyone actually got it to work? I downloaded it last night, and again this morning (in case anything had been fixed overnight) but the archive(s) are still corrupt, so you don't get a full set of data.
druck (+0.1) 1/5/07 9:12AM	Its a bit premature to congratulate ROL as no one has managed to get the download to work yet, but it is a good sign. Lets just hope this is the first step on the road to recovery, leading to sustained development and value for Select customers. Then we can return to the issue of support for the Iyonix.
fylfot (+1.0) 1/5/07 9:32AM	If ROL get this out and it appears stable I will almost certainly renew my subscription (funds permitting). I'm quite impressed with how they appear to have written a ViewFinder driver from scratch which will be better integrated into RISC OS. I wonder how optimised this is because John Kortink refused to open source his driver on the basis that it was commercially valuable and represented much development time. It would be nicer to think that they had licensed John's driver, but who knows? If this turns out to be what it appears to be, then well done ROL. But my god, it's been a hell of time coming, hasn't it? Only 3 more years until the A9home release.
CKH2 (+1.0) 1/5/07 9:38AM	How many Wakefields before ROL finish the version of RISC OS 6 for the A9 home?
jc 1/5/07 9:38AM	The first step following the publication of the Programmer's Reference Manuals and User Guide/tutorials? Both are necessary to assist RO6 on the road to recovery and the three together need programmers producing more (new/updated) software and users buying (hardware/OS/software). If there is a road to recovery it needs everyone taking that road.
sa110 (+2.0) 1/5/07 9:47AM	*In reply to jc:* - There will be no "road to recovery" whilst RO6 does not work on the Iyonix. Frustrated programers are even reiniventing the wheel for RO5 because ROL has sofar not released a single thing fo it. If ROL are unable to do many of the updates that require specific information from CTL in order to implement, they should concentrate on other extra features that do not require such knowledge from CTL. This could as least be release as some sort of Plus Pack for RO5.
jmb (+1.1) 1/5/07 9:53AM	*In reply to sa110:* If you're referring to SelectEmu; it came about because I need abort trapping now and it made sense to make it use the official API. It's not because ROL haven't released anything for the Iyonix. As it happens, much of the code for the AbortTrap implementation in SelectEmu was written years ago -- I've just not had the time to finish it.
fylfot (+6.1) 1/5/07 10:04AM	John Cartmell is in the luxurious position of knowing quite a lot more than 99% of the RISC OS market. In JC's position it's probably all to easy to get excited about what ROL/Advantage 6 are doing behind the scenes. For JC, with this info to hand, there is an obvious future for RISC OS being led by some very capable developers. The problem is, very few people feel the same way as John. Most people don't have a clue what's going on. There's no strong leadership; there's no leadership. There's very poor communication and generally only rumours from people like John. This latest development is excellent news, but the long period of relative silence will no doubt have caused a lot of damage. The sad truth is that even the most dedicated RISC OS users have absolutely no confidence in ROL's ability to provide a future for the platform. It seems that this comes down mainly to one thing, and that's communication. Whilst spending money on updating a web site may detract from what can be spent on OS development, it is ABSOLUTELY essential. Why do we have so much confidence in ArtWorks development? Because there is a friendly, regularly updated web site which documents development in a non-technical manner. Martin's leadship skills are excellent. We pop on his web site and we know exactly what he's done over the last few years and we know what he's doing now and what's coming in the future. Then, believe it or not, he releases a product. Why do we have confidence in Netsurf? For exactly the same reasons. ROL could be in such a powerful position if it got a few of the basics rights. Clear and concise web site. Communication, Etc., rather than death by a thousand whispers.
fylfot (+0.1) 1/5/07 10:11AM	To use an analogy. John Cartmell reminds me of a politician who's spent too much time in Westminister. He's lost track of what ordinary people think and require. He believes that everyone watches Prime Minister's questions when they don't - they don't even care. This isn't an attack on JC. I think he's doing a great job with Qercus (finally), but more of a wake up call to those who believe they know best despite the droves leaving the platform with no idea of what's going on.
JGZimmerle (+3.0) 1/5/07 10:16AM	Typical of the ROL website: There is no online-shop to purchase the new version quickly and easily without having to wait for a human being to process the order and even the links to the PDF and Draw format order forms on http://select.riscos.com/RISCOS6/price.html are broken. I mean, why can't they simply install a decent content management system like Joomla to keep their website up to date and an online shop that integrates with it, like VirtueMart. They are both free and really easy to install.
mrmac (+1.0) 1/5/07 10:32AM	*In reply to arawnsley:* so is it the customers job to actually do ROL's work for them now? I guess I may have missed somthing pertinant to the statement as I can't quite belive you meant that a potential customer should fix ROL's website. ???puzzled??? John
adamr (+1.0) 1/5/07 11:07AM	*In reply to arawnsley:* "no, that stuff [a good website?] doesn't result in more sales" Well, there's a thread on usenet now about someone who bought Messenger from you but didn't know he needed DialUp too. There's a lost sale due to a poorly designed (and still reprehensibly insecure) website
JGZimmerle (+2.0) 1/5/07 11:13AM	*In reply to arawnsley:* Well, I would happily put a CMS and online shop in place for RISCOS Ltd, if they would pay me for it, like I would pay them for making new versions of RISC OS. Or they could just give me a 10-year free subscription to the Select sheme, wich would work out at roughly the same. BTW, does anyone know if Select4i2 finally supports VRPC's 8MB VRAM?
jc 1/5/07 11:27AM	*In reply to sa110:* Even though you're right about RO5 we need to be on that road anyway. If the problem is that Iyonix are causing the delay then it's up to ROL to just get on with what they can and show what's causing the hold-up. *In reply to fylfot:* You are repeating what I said 7/8 years ago. Although the problem of advertising is still there it's a problem that needs the support of us all. I'll continue to chivvy ROL - and do my bit - but everyone needs to sell RISC OS for any of us to get anywhere on that road. As for leadership - that has been made near impossible by some of the vicious statements that are made on Usenet. The only people who avoid them are those who keep their heads down. We certainly need to get all in-fighting behind us. In the past I've not wanted to promote RISC OS because of what people would see if they took a look at what RISC OS was about. I cannot be alone with that view - and that's up to all of us. I want to promote the A9home, Iyonix, Virtual Acorn, and RO6 for older, current, and future machines. That's looking a short way into the future but the road is clearly marked out. As Ian recognises it's a road that I've seen for some years and getting to where we are now has been delayed by that in-fighting. My optimism has been much dented - but if we do all get behind a future for all RISC OS developers then (now I'm allowed) I'll bring everyone up to date with that 'vision'.
VinceH (+0.2) 1/5/07 12:33PM	*In reply to arawnsley:* While I agree that a CMS and online shop won't necessarily lead to an increase in sales, I'm a little surprised that your experimentation led to a decrease. Can you be certain, as your comment seems to suggest, that your decrease in sales was connected to your experimenting with them? I'd be doubtful. A CMS isn't necessary to make a site more presentable or user friendly - this can be managed without one - but it does help when the site becomes large and unweildy, and can help prevent it becoming a sprawling unmaintainable mess; at which point it can lose some user friendliness because it becomes hard to navigate or find things. This, I think, is the problem with RISCOS Ltd's website. To be brutally honest, I think the same can be said for yours (sorry!). It's inconsistent, both in look and feel on different pages, and in navigation methods - and indeed in the actual location of pages, given that AFAICS only the frameset is loaded via the domain name, and all the pages under that from arcsvs.demon.co.uk For instance, I pop along now to http://www.rcomp.co.uk and I get your home page. (This uses frames, as I said above, so if I found something via Google, I may end up with one of your frames as my full browser window with an arcsvs.demon.co.uk address) and I have a basic navigation frame down the left, and a main one taking up most of the window. In that main window, I click on "Internet Suite" - this replaces the main frame with one about your DialUp4. Fair enough. If I click "Order now" this then puts [Link: www.arsvcs.demon.co.uk] in the main frame, with a different coloured version of the same texture, which to my eye looks a bit odd, but never mind. Going back to the main frame, I can click on NetFetch3; this behaves the same way, loading the relevant arsvcs.demon.co.uk page into the main frame - though with a completely different texture, which looks even more odd than the different coloured version of the same one. Back to the main frame, and the WebsterXL link opens a replaces the frameset with a different one. Different colour scheme, now showing arscvs in the URL bar, etc. Back again. Messenger Pro 4; New window, plain white background, etc. Back again, and click on "Grape Vine" under internet tools. This opens a new window and a completely different colour scheme. The order button on that page takes me to [Link: www.arsvcs.demon.co.uk] - the same as filled the frame above after clicking "Order now" for the internet suite, but now it's in its own window, and other than the title bar and copyright footer, there is little there to identify the page as yours. Okay, "rcomp" appears in the URL, but as a subdirectory of arcsvs.demon.co.uk - for all I know, I could be on a phishing site, trying to rip off your customers. (Not least because the ordering page doesn't appear to be secure.) Go back to the main framed window again, and click on Siteseer. This time the page is opened in the frame. And so on. And so forth. I would suggest the following things: 1. Use the domain properly, and don't pick your pages up from your Demon site. It just looks that much more professional if all the pages are loaded from rcomp.co.uk 2. Make the pages consistent, and bearing in mind that framed pages might end up opened in their own right (eg via searches, or from Adjust clicking) put a standard header/footer section on them which identifies them as yours. (Consider using server side includes for this, or if they're unavailable to you, you can download a free copy of the 26 bit version of WebChange which allows you to achieve a similar effect) 3. While I don't object to the use of frames per se, consider the flaws they present - if you must use them, at least use them correctly and consistently. 4. Secure that ordering page! Again, sorry for pointing all this out, but somewhere down the line it has to be said by someone!
fylfot (+1.0) 1/5/07 12:42PM	*In reply to jc:* It would be a great deal easier to "sell RISC OS" if those, like myself, who are already RISC OS users knew what was going on. You see, my main concern isn't trying to "sell RISC OS" but retaining the small number of users who are left. Simply holding users at ransom isn't going to slow down the fall-out: "if you don't spend money, we won't continue producing stuff" is what we're very often told. Such statements are ridiculous. It's incredibly easy to sell a product to a RISC OS user; we're such a willing and loyal bunch. There are users still out there who will buy a product simply to support RISC OS, even if they've no use for the product themselves. When I was selling WebWonder at Wakefield a couple of years back, a pensioner offered to buy a copy but refused to take the CD and manual: "I've got no use for this product, nor for this money, but you seem like a good cause" roughly resemble her words. It was quite some time before I talked her out of it. The "vicious statements that are made on Usenet" are not reasons for ROL to abandon good communication with its loyal market. The noise is from a few individuals: and who can complain them after how they're treated? They're probably the sain ones, the ones with a smaller disposable income. A clear plan and direction, good communication, good web site. That's all we're asking for. We know the model works (ArtWorks, TechWriter, Netsurf - where are the complaints for these products?).
AMS (+4.5) 1/5/07 1:20PM	ROL releasing something (even with the slight website snafu) is still good news. At last they're concentrating on their paying customers (always a good move IMHO). As to other issues SA110 wrote>"If ROL are unable to do many of the updates that require specific information from CTL in order to implement, they should concentrate on other extra features that do not require such knowledge from CTL." What specific information? The source to RO5 will be open, the API is documented, the machine has a published Technical Reference Manual and all the components have datasheets available - what more is there ????? For Iyonix I suspect a better course is continued development of RO5 - with a bit of wheel reinvention where required
hEgelia (+3.6) 1/5/07 2:13PM	Well, it certainly is good news ROL are releasing something new again, although it seems a lot of people don't really care about Select anymore. Which is depressing, but that's the predicament ROL have created for themselves. The "if you don't spend money, we won't continue producing stuff" line fylfot mentioned is something I've heard PM say and it indeed is ridiculous considering he's trying to sell a product which would add features, stability and generally improve the RO experience. The guy just doesn't strike me as enthusiastic about his main product, he doesn't seem really interested in Select itself, but rather to just make money. His presentations seem particularly dull, delivered with a monotonous tone of voice. There's even a typo in the official press release of Select 4i2, which indicates to me he either didn't use a spell checker or proof-read. Although ROL are slowly improving on their communication, they really need to get their website in order, like some other RO companies should. There are so many potentially great things to show on riscos.com - manuals, screenshots, tutorials, RO app hall of fame, end-user stuff, you name it! If ROL want to sell, they've got to use all tools at their disposal, get behind their product in the most enthusiastic way possible. Dry tech specs alone won't do that.
sa110 (+1.0) 1/5/07 3:11PM	*In reply to hEgelia:* You wrote "The guy just doesn't strike me as enthusiastic about his main product, he doesn't seem really interested in Select itself, but rather to just make money. His presentations seem particularly dull, delivered with a monotonous tone of voice." I entirely agree. I have always found his presentations to be on the boring side. Saying that, I can't say I have ever been driven to excitement by any of Jack Lillingston's presentations either. Wouldn't it be great if the main players in the RISC OS world could get together to fund a sales and marketing position. Even if it was part time. Having someone tasked with promoting the platform is better than no one at all. I'm sure they can't do a worse job than what is currently being done.
fylfot (+2.0) 1/5/07 3:15PM	"although it seems a lot of people don't really care about Select anymore" I think people do still care about Select, hence some of the heated discussions. Select is streets ahead of RISC OS 5 in terms of it feeling like a polished operating system. I know which I prefer to use, anyhow. I think Iyonix users would still very much welcome a version of Select, but they've just probably given up hope. Anyway, here's to hoping this new release creates new impetus and momentum!
hubersn (+2.1) 1/5/07 3:42PM	I have not followed Select development too closely after my subscription ended (I wanted to resubscribe once the IYONIX is supported - still waiting for that...), so correct me if I'm wrong. In 2002, we got Select 1 with major new features like DHCP, Joliet-capable CDFS and Multi-user boot. Also in 2002 (followed by a bug-fix release in 2003), Select 2 was released with major new features like CMYK sprites, new !Paint, the ImageFileRenderer/Converter system and mouse wheel support. In 2003 (followed by a bug fix release in 2004), Select 3 was released with major new features like Cut&Paste for writable icons, alpha-channel sprites, the thumbnailing filer and round buttons. And now, in 2007, the major new feature that is announced is...multimedia keyboard support? Obviously the 32bitting and hardware abstraction work was time-consuming, but after all, the majority of paying users does not gain much from it (and Mico/RiscStation/Omega-owning subscribers have gained an incompatible new version from it), and it has been said that the work was being paid by Ad6 for the A9home. So what has been paid by the subscribers between 2004 and 2007? Or was there a subscription extension that I have not heard of? Hopefully the new release signals a "new beginning" for RISCOS Ltd. and their customers.
nijinsky (+1.1) 1/5/07 5:31PM	I stopped subscribing to ROL schemes when they stopped producing something that I needed. IE nothing. That may sound harsh but that is the fact of the matter. I felt I wasted my dosh. I'm now a firm believer of "if they build it they will come" (yea I know a bad film). If they dont have the finance then tuff. It is only a computer after all. Not something I want to chuck hundeds of pounds away on? If I want to do that there are good places like the MS society, guide dogs for the blind etc. DUH And before anyone says they couldn't do it without a regular subscription. Well SkyOS and Amiga spring to mind. And before I get slated. I know of lots of ways in which the platform could be advertised; but that is another story. Cheers Bob; no doubt totally inacurate but still MHO
hzn (+1.0) 2/5/07 5:41AM	*In reply to druck:* "... Then we can return to the issue of support for the Iyonix." Thanks for throwing in something to laugh
hzn (+1.2) 2/5/07 5:41AM	*In reply to JGzimmerle:* "Typical of the ROL website ..." - Well so there is a company offering a full OS but incapable of even getting their website to work - not sure I'd trust that one to be capable to supply a working OS in the first place. - Needing interaction with a human being for online orders for a download sale like for ROL or VA (registration) was ok several years ago but it nowadays is rediculous and more often than not results in me not buying. - Sorry to disagree arawnsley, but I agree that for a company offering someting (and since now ROL does offer something again) they should at least manage to keep some basic working website online (or if they are not capable have it done by others).
1 comment(s) are below your moderation threshold. Login to view them.
Use the forum for more comments on this article